campaignsfandomcom-20200223-history
Forum:The Monopoly of the Republocrats
'Monopoly' is somewhat of a dirty word in the US. We all recall vaguely the bust-ups of the infamous monopolies like Standard Oil, and more recently, Microsoft. In a market economy, the competition that brings about better service and lower prices dissipates in the face of a strong monopoly. The issue is compounded when one organization holds a stranglehold in a market of which people may not 'opt-out.' In these cases, a monopoly begins to resemble tyranny. Suffice to say, the issue of the pervasive collusion between the two strongest political parties in the US is not one to be taken lightly. In any market, the less competitors, the greater the chance of successful collusion. If together Ford and GE provided over 90% of the vehicles operated in the US, we would be concerned. If Coke and Pepsi provided over 90% of the beverages, we would be concerned. If Wal-Mart and Target controlled over 90% of consumer retail, we would be concerned. Together, the Republicans and Democrats represented almost 100% of the voters in the 2004 presidential election. The numbers looked exactly like the chances a coin toss will come up tails, and either way, the Republocrats win. There is one independent senator in the US Senate, Jim Jeffords, who is the consummate Republocrat. There is one independent representative in the US House of Representatives, Bernie Sanders, who is indistinguishable from a 'liberal-leaning' Democrat. The last US President not associated with the Republicans or Democrats was Millard Filmore, of the Whig Party--which held almost the exact policies of present day Democrats (who, at that time, resembled present-day Republicans). President Filmore took office in 1850. States are regularly defined as red or blue. No one even wonders what happened to the white. We are not concerned. The Biggest Fake Fight in History The famed struggle between Democrats and Republicans is one that can be characterized by dramatic posturing and pulled punches. The ruse is instantly apparent to one with even a casual interest in US politics. It continues due only to the vast amount of voter ignorance due to apathy. The apathy exists for good reason--politics are as exciting now as comparing the respective market strategies of Coke and Pepsi. There is nothing new being said, nothing creative being done--just endless reverberations in the echo chamber. Democrats and Republicans pay attention solely to their differences, and the media outlets and general public willingly follow suit. These differences are minuscule. Every issue the Repbublicans and Democrats differ is a 'wedge' issue; an issue that seeks only to divide. This tactic is highly effective in what is effectively a two-party system. If you believe A, you must be with the A-believers; if you believe in ~A, go with the ~A-believers. This would be fine, if not ideal, were it not that the A-believers also believe B, C, and D, which are completely unrelated to A. What does abortion have to do with an unregulated market? What does global warming have to do with labor unions? At times it appears Democrats and Republicans engaged in some sort of 'pick-up' game, where each side took turns picking out random issues for which to stand. Keep your eyes open and it will soon be clear how little the real politicians care about these fake issues. Only the more naive of us could ever witness the ubiquitous contradictions that come with every turnover in the White House and still wonder starry-eyed, 'Why would he say that when three years ago he said...?' Come on, Virginia; it's time to grow up. Both sides use one hand to give hammy shoves to the opponent, while using the other to hold that same opponent up. Why the Fake Fight Continues Many may wonder why collusion between Republicans and Democrats is an issue, if indeed there is any collusion. After all, why be concerned when, together, Republicans and Democrats truly do represent almost 100% of the voters? We should be concerned because, in reality, they don't. The Republocrats did not win 99% of the vote in 2004 by being the best representatives of the American will. They won it because they have been able to worm themselves into a position in which casting a vote against them is 'wasted.' It makes cold, hard, scientific sense, doesn't it? We all know, in the end, it's going to be a Republocrat who wins. (Unless you're in Vermont. In that case, a Republocrat who doesn't call himself a Republocrat may win.) Voting for any other candidate is useless, because there is no way for the candidate to win. Now you're just pulling votes away from your next best choice. I wonder why we don't have IRV in this country? Oops, sorry for the non-sequitor there... The above reasoning may pan out, but it's defeatist and Unamerican. It only works if you see the two parties as separate, which they are not. Look at it this way--any vote you give to a Republican is also for the Democrats, and vice versa. They are friends. It's like hating Slater and voting for Zach. You think Slater's out of the picture now? Sure, they might have their occasional disputes, but eventually they'll always make up and do that shake/hug thing. Do you want to vote for someone who'll do that shake/hug thing with someone you hate? Whether you vote for a Republican or a Democrat, you're voting for the same thing--the perpetuation of the monopoly. It means you enjoy the ineffectual theatrics. It means you enjoy the direction this country is taking. The Real Danger of a Fake Fight As Democrats and Republicans grope each other amorously and try to convince us they're wrestling, the real issues fall by the wayside. Truly diverse thinking is ignored. Creative solutions go unheard. The Republocrats have effectively convinced enough voters that there are really only two choices to any issue. Any issue, that is, the Republocrats want you to consider. The most dangerous aspect of the Republocratic monopoly is the amount of control Republocrats have in guiding our thoughts. Earlier in 2006, immigration suddenly became a major issue again after two decades of being on the backburner. Almost as quickly as it found itself in the spotlight, it found itself back in the wings. Why would this be? Had Lou Dobbs finally taken hold of the hearts and minds of Americans, who then quickly realized they didn't want to deal with that can of worms? Or is it because immigration happens to be President Bush's number one domestic issue at a time when the administration was facing severe scrutiny for its policies overseas (which arguably led to an escalation of weapons of mass destruction in North Korea and gave Iran and Hezbollah the balls to stare down the UN)? Well, it's probably just a coincidence that Bush suddenly sought to make headway on his most nuanced and moderate issue when he was being lambasted for his least nuanced and least moderate issue. Good thing the Democrats saw through that and didn't waste their time dealing with that non-starter, and thank God no other highly divisive domestic issues came up in that time period. Throwing a Real Punch Thomas Jefferson created the Democratic-Republican party way back in the beginning. I submit to you that it is this exact party which rules America today. The differences between these 'opposing' parties is superficial, but loud, disguising their similarities. America needs more diversity in its representation. It needs people who question the utility of a 'War on Terror.' It needs people who actually represent our black and Hispanic population, not white men who are only trying to win over white people who sympathize with minorities. It needs good, honest people who want the best for America. It needs slimy, conniving people who only want the best for their state (or themselves). America must no longer tolerate the dearth of a difference of opinion. Overthrowing this monopoly will be very difficult. The Republocrats are deeply entrenched. The majority of America may be considered compromised--brainwashed, even. The current polarization the Republocrats are responsible for now is not the problem--national unity orchestrated by the Republocrats is also the problem. We must not tolerate emotional manipulation. We must not tolerate empty rhetoric (the real empty rhetoric, not the kind Republocrats accuse other Republocrats of--that's real empty rhetoric...squared). We must not tolerate the false dilemma between A or ~A. There is no easy solution to this problem. It is a problem that has been developing for over 200 years. Defeating it will take perseverance, creativity, but maybe most importantly, outrage. We must all agree wholeheartedly this issue has primacy if any real good is to ever come from American politics. Until then, concerned parties will continued to be played against each other, politicians will still visit sites of national tragedies for photo-ops, and the richly diverse opinions across America will be ignored in favor of simplistic generalizations that aid only in boosting the chances of re-election for career politicians. We need to be concerned. See Also